this looks good to me.
If you want to go ahead and do a new parted build, its fine with me. :).
Regards.
On Tue, Oct 06, 2009 at 11:31:14AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Modify libparted/arch/linux.c _partition_get_part_dev() to not call
> _device_stat() but instead use stat directly, as _device_
Hi Patrice.
Thx for the report. I think you are missing support for XFS and
e2fsprogs. Not sure. Can you pls try to install these and rerun the
test.
Thx.
Regards.
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 04:49:31PM +0200, Patrice Fromy wrote:
> I send you the result of make check
>
>
>
> Patrice Fromy
>
Hi Hakon.
Was this bug hit with gparted or with parted. If its the first, I would
report it to the gparted project (means of contact should come with the
software). If its the latter, can you pls post the exact commands you
used to reproduce this bug.
Thx.
Regards.
On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 10:0
On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 03:01:34PM +0200, Peter Breitenlohner wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Aug 2009, Joel Granados wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 11:53:11AM +0200, Peter Breitenlohner wrote:
>>> The above was with parted-1.9.0;
>>
>> Untill now, there is no interest in
On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 02:08:20PM +0200, Joel Granados wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 11:53:11AM +0200, Peter Breitenlohner wrote:
> > On Mon, 3 Aug 2009, Joel Granados wrote:
> >
> >> This should be primary not pirmary.
...
> > /home/pcl321/peb/archive/gnu/par
On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 11:53:11AM +0200, Peter Breitenlohner wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Aug 2009, Joel Granados wrote:
>
>> This should be primary not pirmary.
>> Can you pls try again.
>
Peter:
Thx for your feedback. It is much appreciated. My comments bellow.
> Hi Joel,
>
On Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 02:17:33PM -0600, Curtis Gedak wrote:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>> Joel Granados wrote:
>>
...
>
> For reference, the output from "make check" for parted-1.9.0 is as follows:
again, pls make sure you are on the "next" branch.
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 02:20:44PM -0600, Curtis Gedak wrote:
> Peter Breitenlohner wrote:
>>> Did you test
>>> your patch. Does it really fix the fact that that the test does not
>>> PASS. ...
>>
>> Yes, of course. The result was the same when running the test via my
>> build+check+install
Did you see Jim's answer?
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 04:59:06PM +0200, Peter Breitenlohner wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Jul 2009, Joel Granados wrote:
>
>> You must be root and you should have done:
>>
>> git clone git://git.debian.org/git/parted/parted.git
>> cd parted
>
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 04:59:06PM +0200, Peter Breitenlohner wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Jul 2009, Joel Granados wrote:
>
>> You must be root and you should have done:
>>
>> git clone git://git.debian.org/git/parted/parted.git
>> cd parted
>> git branch next --tra
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 02:59:21PM +0200, Joel Granados wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 12:31:27PM +0200, Peter Breitenlohner wrote:
> > On Fri, 31 Jul 2009, Joel Granados wrote:
> >
> >> So does t7000 fail for you always? How are you executing the tests?
> >
>
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 12:31:27PM +0200, Peter Breitenlohner wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Jul 2009, Joel Granados wrote:
>
>> So does t7000 fail for you always? How are you executing the tests?
>
> Hi Joel,
>
> from a shell script, executing
> { make check 2>&1
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 02:15:24PM +0200, Peter Breitenlohner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to suggest the attached two patches:
>
> (1) patch-01-test-scripting:
So does t7000 fail for you always? How are you executing the tests?
>
> without this the test failed.
>
> (2) patch-02-check-programs:
>
>
+0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Joel Granados wrote:
> > This is to announce parted-1.9.0, a release we're calling "stable",
> > because we think it's solid enough for general use.
> ...
> > gpg --keyserver keys.gnupg.net --recv-keys B9AB9A16
>
> Hi
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:07:44PM +0200, Joel Granados wrote:
> This is to announce parted-1.9.0, a release we're calling "stable",
> because we think it's solid enough for general use.
>
> For a summary of changes and contributors, see:
> http://git.debian.
On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 08:14:08AM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote:
> Joel Granados wrote:
> > This is to announce parted-1.9.0, a release we're calling "stable",
> > because we think it's solid enough for general use.
> ...
> > gpg --keyserver keys
This is to announce parted-1.9.0, a release we're calling "stable",
because we think it's solid enough for general use.
For a summary of changes and contributors, see:
http://git.debian.org/?p=parted/parted.git;a=shortlog
Thanks to all people who have been testing pre-release, reporting bugs,
c
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:44:37AM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Hello Joel,
>
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 5:11 AM, Joel Granados wrote:
> > Thx for the bug report :)
> >
> > Can you pls expand on what you where doing when you hit this. What
> > command were
Thx for the bug report :)
Can you pls expand on what you where doing when you hit this. What
command were you executing and what your final objective was.
I don't see any 1.8.9 tags on the git repo. What distro are you using?
Note that the latest "stable" release is 1.8.8.
http://ftp.gnu.org/gn
On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 12:47:11PM +, solsTiCe d'Hiver wrote:
> i have a /dev/sda2 _solaris partition with zfs slice
Parted does not support zfs. And, to my knowledge, does not state it
does. Yet another todo item in the TODO list... If you are interested
in posting code for this I would gl
ions", I mean create the
partitions with parted and the filesystem with e2fsprogs or something
that is an expert at creating partitions.
>Then you still have a broken image that you couldn't mount for squat.
I strongly suggest you use some other tool as parted is known to suck at
this.
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 12:44:16PM -0700, Nathan Boettcher wrote:
> I have been trying to use parted to help automate the creation of a disk
> image that I can then write to a card/disk/etc. I use sfdisk to partition
> the image due to parted's inability to update/create the partition table (or
In your case I would create the partition, and then `lvm pvcreate
/dev/DEV` on the new created partition. in that way you have a physical
volume and you can put lvm stuff on top of it.
I also think you can set the "lvm" flag in the partition metadata. I'm
pretty sure that is what you are looking
Hey:
cool, french man page!!!
note that gparted != parted. I'm guessing gparted uses a lot of libparted but
its not the same. I'm also guessing that the ext3 resizing is done with
something different.
Regards.
- "DUFLOT Jean-Luc" wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am translating the parted man pag
I'm assuming the kernel sees the partitions.
What does `cat /proc/partitions` say?
Regards
- "Raj Mathur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 03 Dec 2008, Joel Granados wrote:
> > - "Raj Mathur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
- "Raj Mathur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 Dec 2008, Joel Granados wrote:
> > Hi Raj:
> >
> > What does `parted DEVCE print free` spit out?
>
> Well, I rebooted into an Ubuntu live CD, which allowed me to view the
>
> enti
Hi Roger:
We are up to version 1.8.8 and we are about to release the next version.
Can you test with the latest version please?
Regards
- "Roger Veliquette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am working off from a usb-hdd install. The message I received is as
> follows.
>
> Assertion ((C * head
Hi Raj:
What does `parted DEVCE print free` spit out?
I'm wondering if it would help to just erase the partition table `dd
if=/dev/zero of=DEVICE bs=1024 count=20` and then create a new one from scratch.
Regards.
- "Raj Mathur" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Have a strange problem.
Hi Jidanni:
I think you have a point here in that its not explicitly specified that the
print option will list the specified device partition. But the print option
*is* explained and there are examples of the use of print in the info pages.
The only thing that I would consider including is a
- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> -l, --list
> lists partition layout on all block devices
>
> Why can't one stop this from munching out on all the devices by
> giving
> it an argument, like fdisk -l?
I dont quite follow you, but if you want to print the partition of just one
devi
Hey list:
This message seems ok to me. While I look at the patch I ask myself if it would
not be better a PED_EXCEPTION_ERROR instead of the warning. And, moreover,
what occurs if the user selects ignore as apposed to cancel?
Additionally a test case here would be *great* but how do you actual
- "Sebastian Tennant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi list,
>
> Here's the partition table of my external drive:
>
> GNU Parted 1.8.9
> Using /dev/sde
> Welcome to GNU Parted! Type 'help' to view a list of commands.
> (parted) print
> Model: Maxtor OneTouch II (scsi)
> Disk /dev/sde:
- "stonezhang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear,
> If you do follow:
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb bs=512 count=1
> then you create partition by parted ,it will show "Error: /dev/sdb:
> unrecognised disk label", but fdisk have no this error (/dev/sdb is a
> usb disk).
parted does no
33 matches
Mail list logo
